If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Anybody care to bet that with JR Smith expiring after next year, the Knicks won't want to bring back a 22 year old New York high school legend, Lance Stephenson for 6 Mil Per? (Chump Change)As a UFA on the open market, there is NOTHING holding Lance back, and spurning the Pacers for making him play on a sub million dollar contract for the next year.

Hell, several of you have proclaimed him to be one of the Pacer greats by the time he finishes. A 6 Million dollar deal is VERY reasonable for 21 year old, starting, UFA on the open market.

They drafted him in the second round and gave him a guaranteed contract when they didn't have to. When it became apparent he was the best player to be playing based on the team situation, they played him. They haven't forced him to do anything; he signed the contract. Btw, both Brooklyn and NY will be above the salary cap when Lance is due for resigning. They won't have the cash for that kind of deal. Also, I didn't think to add in JR Smith to the convo. His contract is definitely a bargain for his talent level, but Smith is making under 3M a year as well.

Other teams aren't going to pay 6 million dollars a year from a 2nd round draft pick until he proves he is worth it. He hasn't proved it yet; he shows flashes of brilliance but there are guys all over the league who are 6'5 scoring guards who show flashes of brilliance like Lance but do it on a more consistent basis.

I agree with you that he is capable of that kind of production, but he's not gonna get it until he proves he's better than the crop of similar players out there. There's too many guys in the league who can do that for the market value to be higher than 3-5M per year.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

I'd like to let these guys: Hill, Danny, David, Roy run their course. I think this core can be a contender. I guess if Lance is all of that then maybe its Paul George that is expendable?

If they went with that after next season when Danny's contract expires (and I'm not saying they should) it wouldn't exactly be a youth movement. Lance and Paul would be 5th year players, Hibbert and Hill would be in their 7th season, and West in his 12th.

All of them besides Lance would have been starting for at least 3 years (Hill by putting a couple partial years together) and Lance would even have a couple years of major minutes under his belt. It feels like at this point like that lineup would be extremely young and by just looking at their ages they might be, but they would have quite a bit of experience.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Acting like they fill the same role is a little naive. Granger has always been a SF/PF kind of player. George really did start off playing as a SG/SF and is now transitioning to more of a SF/SG as he gets stronger. Granger likes to get the ball on the block or on the elbow; George likes to start from the perimeter or "posted up" 18 feet from the basket. They have different styles.

Yeah, I don't understand people concerned that George and Granger can't play together. It's not football where players have to line up a certain way. As long as they can guard two guys on the other team (which they can) there's no difference between either of them at the 2 and 3. I don't really see a way it doesn't work unless Granger's knee is really wrecked.

The only fault this team has right now is a lack of consistent scoring. We're going to add a knock down jump shooter and high free throw attempt player, someone who has shown that he has no problem sharing the ball. Why are trying to trade him away? He seems like the kind of player we would be trying to trade FOR.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

I'd like to let these guys: Hill, Danny, David, Roy run their course. I think this core can be a contender. I guess if Lance is all of that then maybe its Paul George that is expendable?

No, a youth Movement is NOT what I am suggesting.

You make it sound like an overhaul. What I am saying is that I prefer a lineup that boasts Hill, Stephenson, George, West and Hibbert (with Granger through next year) for the next 4 years. Over, Hill, George, Granger, maybe West?, and Hibbert for only one more season.

We've already Given Hibbert and Hill a combined 21 Mil... Paul is gonna get a MAX 13 Mil from somebody as an RFA. West is getting offered atleast 10 Mil this offseason from someone. That is 44 Million bucks already. Add 8 Mil between Green and Mahinmi. That is 52 Mil... Plus OJ and Plumlee Puts us at 54 Million. Filling 3 of the 4 remaining roster spots will put us at the soft cap mark and we still have to choose a starting wing and a back up PG for next year.

With salaries escalating over the next few seasons after that. (George's in particular because of the rookie Max) We will be up against the luxury tax (in a small market). Eliminating the ability to do anything. There is no chance to keep West and Granger both after next year. They will make too much money. I am really choosing West over Danny, ultimately. As a "what have you done for me lately option". And a recovered from a ligament (West) over "DEGENERATING KNEE TENDON" (Danny)!!!

This seems alot easier decision than keeping Peyton Manning. And Peyton is about to play for a Super Bowl with somebody else.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Yeah, I don't understand people concerned that George and Granger can't play together. It's not football where players have to line up a certain way. As long as they can guard two guys on the other team (which they can) there's no difference between either of them at the 2 and 3. I don't really see a way it doesn't work unless Granger's knee is really wrecked.

The only fault this team has right now is a lack of consistent scoring. We're going to add a knock down jump shooter and high free throw attempt player, someone who has shown that he has no problem sharing the ball. Why are trying to trade him away? He seems like the kind of player we would be trying to trade FOR.

I am not suggesting that they can't play together. I am suggesting that because of PG's ability to play both 2 or 3, that we have the luxury to choose between keeping either Lance or Danny. IF NEED BE!

I am all for keeping Danny if he will take 6-7 Mil and be the 6th man!!! That would be great! But, if I had to choose between the 2, at this point in their careers (to keep West). I want Lance going forward.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Miami (yes he is better than Haslem)
Philly
Cleveland
Washington
Boston (if they were willing to move KG back to the 4 if not, then no)
Charlotte
Portland (again this is assuming the would prefer to put Aldridge back at the 4)
Dallas (oh the irony)

There are a couple of other teams that if he didn’t start he would get big min. off of the bench.

San Antonio
Phoenix
Memphis
Chicago
New York
Milwaukee

Also I don't disagree about us hurting if Roy went down, but that say's more about Roy's defense than how bad Ian would be.

Sorry, but Mahinmi isn't going to start over a healthy Anderson Varejao.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

You don't keep Granger and risk letting someone like Paul George go. The problem with "win now" mode is that unless you have Mark Cuban as an owner your window is about 1 season long.

We don't have to trade Paul George to be going for the win; he is very much a part of it. It's the older pieces that are still worth good money that is the issue. One solution is to see if we can get West to sign a one year contract for next season so we get 3 years out of this very productive team before needing to make a decision (if we need to make one). I don't know if he'd be willing to do that, but for the Pacers that could be best at this point.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Anybody care to bet that with JR Smith expiring after next year, the Knicks won't want to bring back a 22 year old New York high school legend, Lance Stephenson for 6 Mil Per? (Chump Change)As a UFA on the open market, there is NOTHING holding Lance back, and spurning the Pacers for making him play on a sub million dollar contract for the next year.

Hell, several of you have proclaimed him to be one of the Pacer greats by the time he finishes. A 6 Million dollar deal is VERY reasonable for 21 year old, starting, UFA on the open market.

I just don't see a guard who's averaging a career high of 7 ppg on the worst offensive team in the league getting 6 million a year just yet. I just don't.

Edit: especially when guys at the same position who have produced more consistently throughout their careers (OJ Mayo, Jamal Crawford, Courtney Lee, etc) are all making at least a Mil less than that.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

a) Hibbert was a C, a legit C, a scarce commodity in a market full of "4's" playing "5". The only people suprised by Hibbert's contract, given the amount he progressed, were amateur capologists on fan message boards. While it only takes one team to make a max offer, there were quite a few teams that would've been willing to go there. There was no "gun". There's a big difference between the market for legit 5's and for wing players -no matter how good the wing player might be there are plenty to choose from.

2) Paul George is a wing. A wing that is progressing nicely for his third season. A wing that has shown no signs whatsoever that he's ready to assume clutch duties away from Hill and West in the fourth quarter.

Paul George is taking advantage of being the best wing in our system. We've needed him to step it up and he has. He's been a large part of our success. But he still hasn't been more important that West as a leader, clutch guy, professional; Hibbert for owning the interior defensively (if he ever gets his shooting touch back, to go with his interior presence, he'll be "underpaid"); and Hill for making things go in his own unique way and his own clutch play.

If somebody else wants to give him a max contract, at that point you've got to decide between matching and trading Danny or letting Paul walk. You don't have to make that decision until then.

And I'd love to get the point where we have that problem.

Until then, I'm very happy that Paul is progressing rapidly.

Falk did force our hand because he would not negotiate an extension and then went out and got a max offer which the Pacers were forced to match or loose Hibbert whether they felt he deserved that much or not.

I'm not saying George should be a max player only that I think that is what he will get from some team.

If you wait until George's contract is up Granger will be a free agent and can walk and there is no advantage to a sign and trade anymore. If you gamble and wait it out you risk losing Granger for nothing.

I may be wrong about it and I wish we could keep Granger long term.

My whole point was that looking at the big picture Chad Ford was right that the Pacers will seriously have to explore trading Granger this summer.

I am only stating that this is what I believe they will do not that it is what I want them to do but if it is between West and Granger
I believe keeping West is more important.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

I am not suggesting that they can't play together. I am suggesting that because of PG's ability to play both 2 or 3, that we have the luxury to choose between keeping either Lance or Danny. IF NEED BE!

I am all for keeping Danny if he will take 6-7 Mil and be the 6th man!!! That would be great! But, if I had to choose between the 2, at this point in their careers (to keep West). I want Lance going forward.

I wasn't quoting aamc in relation to what you said, I actually agree with most of what you're saying (although I'd rather keep Granger than Lance, it's not by much). I just liked what he was saying as far as the Chad Fords of the world constantly trying to trade Granger for peanuts. My bad for not being clear there.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Falk did force our hand because he would not negotiate an extension and then went out and got a max offer which the Pacers were forced to match or loose Hibbert whether they felt he deserved that much or not.

I don't know about forcing our hand; I could have gotten Roy the same contract Falk did. It basically boiled down to "Hey Roy, don't lose both legs in a freak tractor accident in the next 8 months and someone will give you a max deal."

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Trader Joe For This Useful Post:

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Of West, Granger, and George, the one we can most afford to lose is West, even though it would still be significant. Hibbert and Mahimi would have to start, Hans would have to be the first big off the bench, then you have to hope against hope that Plumlee can be the second big off the bench.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Of West, Granger, and George, the one we can most afford to lose is West, even though it would still be significant. Hibbert and Mahimi would have to start, Hans would have to be the first big off the bench, then you have to hope against hope that Plumlee can be the second big off the bench.

I don't understand that take at all. I want to keep all 3, but to me it's pretty obvious that from a purely basketball stand point if you're going to cut one loose it is Danny.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

No matter how good he's been lately, Paul George won't be getting a max contract until he shows he's better than a healthy Danny Granger when both are healthy. He'll get a nice salary bump, up to something between what Hill and West are making.

Until he takes over their roles in the 4Q, there's no way he's getting close to a max deal.

He's playing well, I'm not complaining. And mostly, he's keeping things interesting until David and George need to make clutch plays.

If that gets him a max, then our salary situation is #$%^ed for a decade.

Sorry to disagree. PG will get a Max contract b/c, like with Hibbert, some team will give him a Max offer sheet the Pacers will have to match. You better get ready and prepare yourself that PG will get a Max contract, unless the Pacers can get him to accept a less than max extension now.

Not to mention, PG has another year and a half to grow b4 his contract expires to get even better. "IF" he should become an Allstar this year or next year, he's a sure bet for a MAX contract too.

Be prepared to pay PG a Max contract next off season unless something happens to him or his game.

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Care to expand on that idea a little more? Is it because you feel Danny's presence/skills are more easily replaced than D.West?

I'm probably a little biased because I'm a HUGE Danny fan, but I feel that David can be easier replaced.

Simply that I feel the drop down from West to Tyler is much bigger than from Danny to Lance. This is more of a slight against Tyler than against Danny. I like what Tyler has given us off the bench but I cringe at the idea of him as a starter and while I would love to see Ian and Hibbert together at times I don't think them being the starting front court makes sense either

Re: Chad Ford Chat

Simply that I feel the drop down from West to Tyler is much bigger than from Danny to Lance. This is more of a slight against Tyler than against Danny. I like what Tyler has given us off the bench but I cringe at the idea of him as a starter and while I would love to see Ian and Hibbert together at times I don't think them being the starting front court makes sense either

I'd assume if we let West go, we would look to sign a replacement that was cheaper (Carl Landry anybody) but of course, if a player is cheaper, they are probably not as good. There's no way I'd want to see a starting lineup that included Tyler OR Ian barring injury.